LeBron vs Curry looking only at 14-15 season to now

[ceiling raiser]

I really miss the old fpliii who was fun, logical, and someone I wanted to have a beer with.

I’ve said very recently I have LeBron as my GOAT, mostly on the basis of his career in Cleveland (first stint) and Miami, and given how long he’s been a top 5 player. Doesn’t mean I have to think he’s better post-peak than peak Curry, who I have as a borderline top five player all-time.

What lead you to pushing up Lebron as your GOAT? I think you had Bill Russell #1 for a time if I am correct?

My criteria has always been performance in today’s league. What Russell did was incredible, but I don’t think he would be able to have the same impact in the 2023 NBA.

LeBron has more top 5 seasons than anybody in NBA history. I don’t think there’s a realistic case having him below #1 at this point.

[ceiling raiser]

2015: Curry
2016: Curry
2017: Curry
2018: Curry
2019: Curry
2020: LeBron
2021: Curry
2022: Curry
2023: Curry

I really miss the old fpliii who was fun, logical, and someone I wanted to have a beer with.

That's fpliii?? What happened or are you joking

I changed my display name a while back. Took time off after the board was tough to read during the 2016 election cycle.

I admittedly have made some baity posts about Kobe and LeBron (not a fan of either of their games) on the general board, but I’ve tried to be very genuine on the PC board.

[Doctor MJ]

So I'm going to post some raw +/- stuff. Take it for what you will:

Regular Season cumes for this period:

1. Curry +5103
2. Green +4075
9. LeBron +2683

Playoffs:

1. Green +971
2. Curry +894
3. LeBron +654

All-Season:

1. Curry +6005
2. Green +5044
7. LeBron +3336

What analytical value does raw +/- have, Doc?

It's a thing to keep in mind.

When a guy is putting up extremely high raw numbers, and it's still not enough to rise quite to the top of the regression-based models, then it really only makes sense to knock him if you think he'd have had to make the team THAT much better in order to match the achievement of the player with better regression numbers whose team is less successful with him on the floor.

And while one can argue that the Curry-Durant Warriors should have been able to have even greater game-by-game dominance, and thus even higher raw totals, I kinda doubt that's what anyone is really focused on.

I think in general people feel like both Curry & Durant "had it easy" and discount the accomplishment. And depending on how they do it, I don't think it's an inherently bad approach.

But I'm looking at the Curry-Durant Warriors as the greatest team in basketball history, and most certainly not because it was the first time people tried to make an unbeatable super-team. I mean, the Lakers added Wilt Chamberlain to a team that had two players firmly categorized as superstars - it's been going on for decades.

And yet, it was the Curry-Durant team that I think rose to the pinnacle of what we've seen in NBA basketball. I'm impressed a great deal by that.

[Doctor MJ]

So I'm going to post some raw +/- stuff. Take it for what you will:

Regular Season cumes for this period:

1. Curry +5103
2. Green +4075
9. LeBron +2683

Playoffs:

1. Green +971
2. Curry +894
3. LeBron +654

All-Season:

1. Curry +6005
2. Green +5044
7. LeBron +3336

What analytical value does raw +/- have, Doc?

None. But Lebron smokes if you include the "off" bit, sooooo

Your cynicism is unhelpful. Please restrain yourself.

For the record, there's no intuitively obvious way to accumulate on/off across seasons meaningfully - I don't consider anything with regression to be "obvious" for the average basketball fan - but if you want to just go by career average On/Off in general, Curry looks pretty monstrous.

Curry: RS On/Off +11.3, PS On/Off +12.0
LeBron: RS On/Off +10.8, PS On/Off +10.3

[NbaAllDay]

Are people factoring D into this? I know Lebron hasn't been a DPOY calibre since Miami however it feel like the gap is significant enough there that anything close offensively would lean in Lebrons favour.

[letskissbro]

Honestly?

15 - LeBron was better come playoff time
16 - LeBron was clearly better come playoff time
17 - LeBron was better year-round
18 - LeBron was better year-round
19 - About even during the RS and I trust that LeBron would've been better in the playoffs
20 - LeBron again elevates to a level of postseason play Curry has never reached, Curry misses the season
21 - About even during the RS before LeBron's injury and had he been healthy I trust that LeBron would've been better in the playoffs
22 - LeBron was better but misutilized to an extreme degree throughout the RS***
23 - About even during the RS and roughly as good as each other in their head-to-head series despite LeBron playing injured

***Tired of people acting like this wasn't easily Curry's worst season since 2014. The box score isn't RNG. You can't "ramp up" your intangibles to offset a drop off unless your style of play significantly changes. Ironically LeBron's intangibles saw a massive decline this season due to a change in role with a broken roster and Davis' absence.

I don't need regular season box score stats or plus-minus to tell me that the guy with the better skillset who consistently and historically elevates his play to a level beyond what the other guy has ever proven capable of when necessary, is actually the better player. Your numbers are a product of your environment and Curry's had a giant leg up in that department every year outside of 2020 and 2021. Cracks always start to show up in the playoffs however.

Durability arguments fall flat for me here since they've been roughly as injury prone as each other the last few seasons and the consequence of missing time depends on timing and your team's ability to stay afloat without you. Perception is skewed because LeBron's had worse luck in those areas but Curry has missed 20 more games than LeBron since 2019.

[LukaTheGOAT]

some of your numbers are definitely not right, for example, the RAPM
https://basketball-analytics.gitlab.io/rapm-data/

from 15-19
Curry: 5.7734
Lebron:3.5294

Nope, that is a different RAPM source, and also doesn't have multi-year RAPM.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQdG8Zv84zqKEzETDjd8KPsClcw9bPETX9v_x_KEAxjv9NrFaWikOoiSaciy1jbMiygg2D-V8DUQn0O/pubhtml?gid=721454147&single=true

Is this multi-year RAPM calculated in a similar way as ESPN's RPM(just with the added adjustment of teammates)?

So there is no one formula for RAPM. There are many different flavors and ways to run. The consistent thing between all pure RAPM-models is that it is plus-minus only (so includes nothing from the box-score). This particular RAPM I believe comes from shadow from the APBRmetrics model.

For additional reading on RAPM:

https://www.reddit.com/r/nbadiscussion/comments/cpsu8n/basketball_stat_regularized_adjusted_plusminus/

https://basketballstat.home.blog/2019/08/14/regularized-adjusted-plus-minus-rapm/

The current ESPN RPM is a black-box stat, so we have virtually no insight on what exactly goes into it. The stat has been redone multiple times, and the initial developers (Jeremias Englemann and Stevw Ilardi who are both on Twitter) are no longer there at ESPN. This is what RPM initially was: https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/10740818/introducing-real-plus-minus

[PaulieWal]

2015: Curry
2016: Curry
2017: Curry
2018: Curry
2019: Curry
2020: LeBron
2021: Curry
2022: Curry
2023: Curry

I really miss the old fpliii who was fun, logical, and someone I wanted to have a beer with.

I’ve said very recently I have LeBron as my GOAT, mostly on the basis of his career in Cleveland (first stint) and Miami, and given how long he’s been a top 5 player. Doesn’t mean I have to think he’s better post-peak than peak Curry, who I have as a borderline top five player all-time.

I don't see 2016-2018 LeBron as post-peak LeBron and I think LeBron was considerably better than him in 2016-2018 that's why your list took my be surprise.

If you genuinely feel that way, then it's fine. Just wasn't sure if this was the real you or you just messing around.

[eminence]

'15 - Curry, small lead
'16 - LeBron, small lead (Curry '16 is one of the more variable seasons to evaluate, so I can see a fair margin of difference here)
'17 - Curry, small lead (a contender for my pick for most underrated season around, I still remember a POY vote for Wall over Curry and Curry off that ballot, crazy stuff)
'18 - LeBron, medium lead (I thought Curry was looking best in the RS prior to inury, but didn't return to form after injury and overall have it as one of his lower seasons)
'19 - Curry, medium lead
'20 - LeBron, duh
'21 - Curry, small lead
'22 - Curry, medium lead
'23 - ??? currently would have Curry, small lead

[Doctor MJ]

Nope, that is a different RAPM source, and also doesn't have multi-year RAPM.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQdG8Zv84zqKEzETDjd8KPsClcw9bPETX9v_x_KEAxjv9NrFaWikOoiSaciy1jbMiygg2D-V8DUQn0O/pubhtml?gid=721454147&single=true

Is this multi-year RAPM calculated in a similar way as ESPN's RPM(just with the added adjustment of teammates)?

So there is no one formula for RAPM. There are many different flavors and ways to run. The consistent thing between all pure RAPM-models is that it is plus-minus only (so includes nothing from the box-score). This particular RAPM I believe comes from shadow from the APBRmetrics model.

For additional reading on RAPM:

https://www.reddit.com/r/nbadiscussion/comments/cpsu8n/basketball_stat_regularized_adjusted_plusminus/

https://basketballstat.home.blog/2019/08/14/regularized-adjusted-plus-minus-rapm/

The current ESPN RPM is a black-box stat, so we have virtually no insight on what exactly goes into it. The stat has been redone multiple times, and the initial developers (Jeremias Englemann and Stevw Ilardi who are both on Twitter) are no longer there at ESPN. This is what RPM initially was: https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/10740818/introducing-real-plus-minus

You laid it out well Luka.

And incidentally, part of the reason why I tend to put raw +/- forward as a starting point to conversations is because RAPM isn't a single stat. If there was only one way to do it, and thus only one set of numbers to work with, it would be easier to introduce to people.

I do think everybody should be looked at RAPM - nbashotcharts.com is my current go-to for it - but since it's hard to use it as a first step analysis (due to disagreement by source) and it's not the last step in analysis (because that's holistic), it makes it a less useful tool for dialogue than I once had hoped.

Also, I like your description of the RPM issues. I remember when Englemann first came out with XRAPM (the prototype for what RPM became) and explained it on the APBRmetrics forum around 2012. The response from most of the statisticians was fawning, and meanwhile I was shouting from the rafters:

It's not your job to make an all-in-one stat, it's your job to make something analysts can use in conjunction with the stats that already exist. You've just taken a more useful stat (RAPM) and replaced it with a black-box stat (XRAPM) which factors those other stats in without allowing us to see how it does it, and so we can't even hope to figure out double-counting issues. How the hell do you not see the problem here?

And of course the answer is, these statisticians don't understand basketball well enough to see the problem, and have made an arms race to try to figure out who can best make predictions using their stat and their stat alone.

While I'm ranting:

RAPM is itself based on APM, and APM did have a universal standard. I wasn't opposed to adding RAPM to supplement APM because the need to reduce noise was large, but it basically replaced APM with common availability and the statistician community never seemed to understand why APM had utility that could not be made obsolete by RAPM.

Last thing:

To be clear, as I alluded to in my post above, I don't think it ever makes sense to only look at regressed +/- when doing a thorough analysis. The raw stuff provides context that allows you to better grasp what the regressed stuff can speak to. But the regressed stuff could be better laid out in the public domain, and if it were, I'd feel more comfortable starting conversations with it.

[eminence]

Is this multi-year RAPM calculated in a similar way as ESPN's RPM(just with the added adjustment of teammates)?

So there is no one formula for RAPM. There are many different flavors and ways to run. The consistent thing between all pure RAPM-models is that it is plus-minus only (so includes nothing from the box-score). This particular RAPM I believe comes from shadow from the APBRmetrics model.

For additional reading on RAPM:

https://www.reddit.com/r/nbadiscussion/comments/cpsu8n/basketball_stat_regularized_adjusted_plusminus/

https://basketballstat.home.blog/2019/08/14/regularized-adjusted-plus-minus-rapm/

The current ESPN RPM is a black-box stat, so we have virtually no insight on what exactly goes into it. The stat has been redone multiple times, and the initial developers (Jeremias Englemann and Stevw Ilardi who are both on Twitter) are no longer there at ESPN. This is what RPM initially was: https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/10740818/introducing-real-plus-minus

You laid it out well Luka.

And incidentally, part of the reason why I tend to put raw +/- forward as a starting point to conversations is because RAPM isn't a single stat. If there was only one way to do it, and thus only one set of numbers to work with, it would be easier to introduce to people.

I do think everybody should be looked at RAPM - nbashotcharts.com is my current go-to for it - but since it's hard to use it as a first step analysis (due to disagreement by source) and it's not the last step in analysis (because that's holistic), it makes it a less useful tool for dialogue than I once had hoped.

Also, I like your description of the RPM issues. I remember when Englemann first came out with XRAPM (the prototype for what RPM became) and explained it on the APBRmetrics forum around 2012. The response from most of the statisticians was fawning, and meanwhile I was shouting from the rafters:

It's not your job to make an all-in-one stat, it's your job to make something analysts can use in conjunction with the stats that already exist. You've just taken a more useful stat (RAPM) and replaced it with a black-box stat (XRAPM) which factors those other stats in without allowing us to see how it does it, and so we can't even hope to figure out double-counting issues. How the hell do you not see the problem here?

And of course the answer is, these statisticians don't understand basketball well enough to see the problem, and have made an arms race to try to figure out who can best make predictions using their stat and their stat alone.

While I'm ranting:

RAPM is itself based on APM, and APM did have a universal standard. I wasn't opposed to adding RAPM to supplement APM because the need to reduce noise was large, but it basically replaced APM with common availability and the statistician community never seemed to understand why APM had utility that could not be made obsolete by RAPM.

Last thing:

To be clear, as I alluded to in my post above, I don't think it ever makes sense to only look at regressed +/- when doing a thorough analysis. The raw stuff provides context that allows you to better grasp what the regressed stuff can speak to. But the regressed stuff could be better laid out in the public domain, and if it were, I'd feel more comfortable starting conversations with it.

I too wish APM would make a comeback.

[Doctor MJ]

I suppose I'll do the year-by-year.

'14-15: Curry
'15-16: LeBron
'16-17: Curry
'17-18: Curry
'18-19: Curry
'19-20: LeBron
'20-21: Curry
'21-22: Curry

Big point of conversation here is how we judge '16-17 & '17-18. Understandable why people would pick LeBron here, but Curry did win the title. That doesn't clinch the comparison obviously, but it's not something I brush aside lightly.

Doc - How close is 16 for you? LeBron closed strong in the Finals, but hard to ignore Curry’s season there. Also the controversy of the Draymond suspension tints valuation for me.

It's a good question.

I remember back when we went into the finals in '15-16 and folks saying that it didn't matter what happened in the finals, no one could top Curry given what Curry had done that season. Then Game 7 ended and it proved very difficult for people to hold on to that view.

To the question of "close", I might put it like this: If I quantified accomplishment for a particular season, I'd have LeBron just barely over Curry, but despite this I don't see it as something that I debate much about. In the end, bragging rights in NBA basketball come with the playoffs, and all the players know this and feel the sting of disappointment if they fall short there.

I think for me the frustrating part of the effect of the 2016 finals is not that LeBron ends up being the #1 for that season, but the way it ended essentially making it that people kept elevating LeBron over Curry in subsequent seasons because of it. Obviously KD doesn't go to GS if they win the 2016 chip, but just from a perspective of GS winning the next two seasons, if things had played out exactly the same way except for GS winning in 2016, I think Curry gets the POY in both of those years.

Bill Simmons likes to talk in terms of "title belts" like boxers have, and I think it's one of many Simmons-isms that speaks really well to how we fans tend to think. It felt like the 2016 finals was the championship bout for the belt between LeBron & Steph, and then people just didn't count the 2017 or 2018 because Steph had an unfair advantage.

Now, all of this is is a bit unfair to folks to be honest. Had Curry gone for insane scoring numbers and won Finals MVP in a landslide those years, we probably get a different result. Nevertheless, those votes go differently if everything else remains the same but GS wins the 2016 finals.

[Doctor MJ]

I think 2018 is clearly Lebron to me, I don't really see any credible argument in Curry's favor there honestly.

Consider it this way:

LeBron basically took the RS off, and in the Finals gave the Warriors less of a fight than any of their 3 West playoff opponents - each of whom had a better SRS than the Cavs.

So if you're giving LeBron the award for 2018, you're largely doing it on the basis of what he did in the Eastern playoffs where his team barely beat a young Boston team that wouldn't have a prayer against Boston last year or this year.

And I would suggest that there's probably no way you're doing this if you aren't already convinced that LeBron has the title belt for best player in the world going into the season, which is an approach I'm not comfortable with.

[Colbinii]

I think 2018 is clearly Lebron to me, I don't really see any credible argument in Curry's favor there honestly.

Consider it this way:

LeBron basically took the RS off, and in the Finals gave the Warriors less of a fight than any of their 3 West playoff opponents - each of whom had a better SRS than the Cavs.

So if you're giving LeBron the award for 2018, you're largely doing it on the basis of what he did in the Eastern playoffs where his team barely beat a young Boston team that wouldn't have a prayer against Boston last year or this year.

And I would suggest that there's probably no way you're doing this if you aren't already convinced that LeBron has the title belt for best player in the world going into the season, which is an approach I'm not comfortable with.

LeBron played 82 games in 2018 and posted 27/8/9 with a roster that was messed up due to Kyrie Irving requesting out.

We all know this wasn't LeBron's fault, given the history Kyrie has shown since then.

I have a hard time seeing the argument for "LeBron basically took the RS off".

Did you not see game 1? How did LeBron not give the Warriors a fight? Oh, you mean the pathetic roster of Cleveland didn't give them a fight?

[tone wone]

Honestly?

15 - LeBron was better come playoff time
16 - LeBron was clearly better come playoff time
17 - LeBron was better year-round
18 - LeBron was better year-round
19 - About even during the RS and I trust that LeBron would've been better in the playoffs
20 - LeBron again elevates to a level of postseason play Curry has never reached, Curry misses the season
21 - About even during the RS before LeBron's injury and had he been healthy I trust that LeBron would've been better in the playoffs
22 - LeBron was better but misutilized to an extreme degree throughout the RS***
23 - About even during the RS and roughly as good as each other in their head-to-head series despite LeBron playing injured

***Tired of people acting like this wasn't easily Curry's worst season since 2014. The box score isn't RNG. You can't "ramp up" your intangibles to offset a drop off unless your style of play significantly changes. Ironically LeBron's intangibles saw a massive decline this season due to a change in role with a broken roster and Davis' absence.

I don't need regular season box score stats or plus-minus to tell me that the guy with the better skillset who consistently and historically elevates his play to a level beyond what the other guy has ever proven capable of when necessary, is actually the better player. Your numbers are a product of your environment and Curry's had a giant leg up in that department every year outside of 2020 and 2021. Cracks always start to show up in the playoffs however.

Durability arguments fall flat for me here since they've been roughly as injury prone as each other the last few seasons and the consequence of missing time depends on timing and your team's ability to stay afloat without you. Perception is skewed because LeBron's had worse luck in those areas but Curry has missed 20 more games than LeBron since 2019.

It's funny, Lebrons Laker years represents a real decline for James. Age related athletic decline and major durability issues. Yet, I'd argue Stephs argument over him has actually gotten worse during this time frame. And ita for 2 simple reasons...

1. LeBron's a flat out better player. So even with his athletic and durability fall-off Curry has actually missed more games over this stretch. If you notice there's very little evidence of Curry being better in 2021 other than games played. Prior to his ankle injury Lebron was superior.

2. Lebrons Laker tenure coincides with Golden State no longer being the deepest most talented team in the league. With a great front office to match. They've had all sorts of problems these last 5 seasons. So the fake intangible nonsense that some used to paint James Cleveland 2.0 tenure as a failure can't be used anymore. Steph no longer has a roster that's nearly perfectly calibrated to cover his weaknesses and enhance his strengths and suddenly he's no longer lapping the field in "impact"

[RCM88x]

I think 2018 is clearly Lebron to me, I don't really see any credible argument in Curry's favor there honestly.

Consider it this way:

LeBron basically took the RS off, and in the Finals gave the Warriors less of a fight than any of their 3 West playoff opponents - each of whom had a better SRS than the Cavs.

So if you're giving LeBron the award for 2018, you're largely doing it on the basis of what he did in the Eastern playoffs where his team barely beat a young Boston team that wouldn't have a prayer against Boston last year or this year.

And I would suggest that there's probably no way you're doing this if you aren't already convinced that LeBron has the title belt for best player in the world going into the season, which is an approach I'm not comfortable with.

Maybe you're getting the timeline messed up here but I don't agree with any of this at all. Why are we using team performance as the primary method for player evaluation? Seems like an extremely reductive way to think about this.

[Colbinii]

I think 2018 is clearly Lebron to me, I don't really see any credible argument in Curry's favor there honestly.

Consider it this way:

LeBron basically took the RS off, and in the Finals gave the Warriors less of a fight than any of their 3 West playoff opponents - each of whom had a better SRS than the Cavs.

So if you're giving LeBron the award for 2018, you're largely doing it on the basis of what he did in the Eastern playoffs where his team barely beat a young Boston team that wouldn't have a prayer against Boston last year or this year.

And I would suggest that there's probably no way you're doing this if you aren't already convinced that LeBron has the title belt for best player in the world going into the season, which is an approach I'm not comfortable with.

Maybe you're getting the timeline messed up here but I don't agree with any of this at all. Why are we using team performance as the primary method for player evaluation? Seems like an extremely reductive way to think about this.

Let's not forget Curry missed 31 regular season games and 6 playoff games.

Would the Cavaliers have beaten the Pacers without LeBron James?

[Djoker]

Are people factoring D into this? I know Lebron hasn't been a DPOY calibre since Miami however it feel like the gap is significant enough there that anything close offensively would lean in Lebrons favour.

Not necessarily. Lebron is not a big man and as such generally has quite small value on defense post 2013.

Anyways breaking this down year by year as others have done:

2015 - Curry
2016 - Lebron (Curry had a monster regular season but he missed playoff games and came up short in the Finals which still counts for a lot)
2017 - Lebron (by a bit)
2018 - Wash (Lebron regressed too much defensively; plus Cavs overrated in terms of team success probably lose in the 1st round in the West)
2019 - Curry
2020 - Lebron
2021 - Curry
2022 - Curry
2023 - Curry

Overall I'd go Curry by a bit. Those who penalize Curry for basically zero value in 2020 is understandable but Lebron's value in 2019, 2021 and 2022 is also far lower than Curry's. Like they aren't really comparable in those seasons at all. Even this season and postseason thus far Curry is possibly a tier ahead in impact. Lebron could flip it with a title and FMVP.

[RCM88x]

Are people factoring D into this? I know Lebron hasn't been a DPOY calibre since Miami however it feel like the gap is significant enough there that anything close offensively would lean in Lebrons favour.

Not necessarily. Lebron is not a big man and as such generally has quite small value on defense post 2013.

Anyways breaking this down year by year as others have done:

2015 - Curry
2016 - Lebron (Curry had a monster regular season but he missed playoff games and came up short in the Finals which still counts for a lot)
2017 - Lebron (by a bit)
2018 - Wash (Lebron regressed too much defensively; plus Cavs overrated in terms of team success probably lose in the 1st round in the West)
2019 - Curry
2020 - Lebron
2021 - Curry
2022 - Curry
2023 - Curry

Overall I'd go Curry by a bit. Those who penalize Curry for basically zero value in 2020 is understandable but Lebron's value in 2019, 2021 and 2022 is also far lower than Curry's. Like they aren't really comparable in those seasons at all. Even this season and postseason thus far Curry is possibly a tier ahead in impact. Lebron could flip it with a title and FMVP.

IMO they're at least comparable in 2021, Lebron was the MVP co-favorite till the end of March. Curry didn't really start his hot streak until after that. I do think 2021 is one of Curry's better regular season's but that doesn't just put it head and shoulders over Lebron's season by default.

Curry effectively didn't play at all in 2020 where Lebron won the title as the best player; that is chasm of a gap. I'm not even sure if that's made up by the combined additional value of Curry's seasons in 19, 21 and 22.

[Heej]

I think 2018 is clearly Lebron to me, I don't really see any credible argument in Curry's favor there honestly.

Consider it this way:

LeBron basically took the RS off, and in the Finals gave the Warriors less of a fight than any of their 3 West playoff opponents - each of whom had a better SRS than the Cavs.

So if you're giving LeBron the award for 2018, you're largely doing it on the basis of what he did in the Eastern playoffs where his team barely beat a young Boston team that wouldn't have a prayer against Boston last year or this year.

And I would suggest that there's probably no way you're doing this if you aren't already convinced that LeBron has the title belt for best player in the world going into the season, which is an approach I'm not comfortable with.

Hard to make the case that someone took an entire regular season off when they played every single game lol.

I think the real summary of 2018 is that end to end LeBron simply played better than Steph. And for the people that want to dock him points for punching a whiteboard and destroying his jumper for the rest of the Finals (*cough* Nate Duncan *cough*), that's on you. But that's still a tough case to make that Curry outplayed him for the entire season.

Especially when one of the big talking points that playoff run was the Warriors going back to featuring KD primarily in their offense when he wasn't getting enough touches in early rounds. And the Warriors played better from there. Hard for me to give Curry points for this over LeBron when the team collectively decided they felt safer in the playoffs giving KD primacy